Due to member demand, the 9/11 forum is now under close staff scrutiny., page 6
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7    8    9  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 56 times


reply posted on 14-6-2007 @ 11:08 AM by Majic
A Positive Bias

Originally posted by Griff
I am guilty of the accusation of biasness. For that I am truly sorry.

If anyone here is perfect, let them speak now or forever hold their peace.

You've been around for a while, so you may well remember how I used to lay an incredible amount of grief on the staff for pretty much everything.

Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony.

In fairness to everyone who suspects bias on the part of the staff, I think it's important to point out that every one of us does have our own opinions on the issues and -- though the "Cosmic Culture" considers it a cardinal sin -- our opinions may influence our decisions as moderators.

It's happened before, it may well be happening now and it will most certainly happen again.

So I'm not denying that moderator bias exists. Despite our best efforts to prevent it from happening, it happens.

That's the bad news.

The good news is that the ATS moderator community is committed to doing something about it, and that's why despite the many frivolous complaints we get about moderator bias, we check out every one of them, because if we didn't, it would hurt every one of us.

We know we walk a fine line between enforcing the
terms & conditions for everyone's benefit and being too heavy-handed with our members, which would be so hurtful to our community that it makes me cringe just thinking about it.

And indeed, when we do have to bring some smack down now and then, I pray that the vast, overwhelming majority of our members who honor the T&C won't feel like we're targeting them, because we most certainly are not.

I guess the short version of what I'm trying to say here is that you need never apologize for keeping an eye on us and being suspicious. In fact, I think anything else would be unhealthy.

Rather, I want you to know that when you catch any of us doing something wrong, we want you to tell us immediately, because we don't want to let you down.

Just sayin'.


reply posted on 5-7-2007 @ 06:34 PM by SkepticOverlord
Originally posted by pantheria
Wow! what is happening it appears as if every bastion of free speech on the Internet is under attack and they are pitting one group against the other.

I'm not sure I'd consider any of the 9/11-specific forums/boards/blogs to be concerned with "free speech." All of them have a specific agenda tied to either a collection of theories, or one or more popular personalities. If you're posting material contrary to their agenda, it's removed. If you do it often, you're banned.


who profits

That's a good question. There are some obvious "conspiracy profiteers" in the mix... those who have high-profile theories, products, or names where significant revenue is on the line. These certainly don't want contrary ideas harming their income stream.

Clearly, there are a few who are merely seeking attention. They're either jealous of the attention being fawned on the profiteers, or they're simply attention-junkies in the first place.

But there are also some we might consider to be professional disinformationists as well. The Webfairy and Nico Haupt are increasingly theorized to be in this group.


and do the groups know they are being played.

Some do... the rest like to play (it seems). It's a mess.


And it's a mess we don't want. Which is why ATS will "officially" never have an opinion on any subject other than what's needed to support the free and open expression of any idea or theory within civilized rules of decorum.



reply posted on 18-8-2007 @ 08:30 PM by jondular
Think about this.
A plane hit a 110 story building.
Each floor was one acre in size.
Most of the fuel was burned away ie. the fireballs in each crash.
The planes went in at a slight angle or tipped where 4 or 5 floors were damaged.
These buildings had a center core of some of the largest steel supports of any building on the planet.
The building also had a skirt of steel all around the building.
Inside was normal furniture and office supplies.
Now how did a plane and some fuel weaken the 100 floors that were not damaged?
How can damaged parts of a building fall into undamaged floors and continue to have the force to crumble the entire building into dust?
The weaker parts of the building should have met resistance at some point and fall off to the side leaving the rest of the building in place.
If you hit a tree with a plane it might knock it down or break it off but, it would hardly turn it in to sawdust!
Go outside and walk the distance of an acre.
That is a 220 foot square area. Steel works as a heat sink.
It absorbs the heat and transfers it to the cooler parts of the steel.
The closer the damage traveled down the more resistance it should meet from the undamaged part.
Instead in free fall speed those entire buildings blew up into dust.
The north and south towers from the top down and building 7 from the bottom.
Seven was damaged only on one side yet it went straight down in free fall speed.
If you knock out a leg from a table it falls to the weakest side not straight down. This is a no brainer.
Anyone who believes otherwise is with the terrorists!
And we know who they are!


reply posted on 26-8-2007 @ 02:42 AM by Conspiriology
Well I am new to this forum but not new to forums like this. I had been a member of several others including Jref.

Four months ago I was forwarded a private message that had been sent in a round robin to select JREF debunkers. The pvt message was of a plan orchestrated to do just what seems to have happened here.

They were to sign up as truthers on forums like this and as a matter of fact this place was listed. They then were supposed to post very wild conspiracy theories. The kind even I would get angry at but then again I am pretty skeptical as truthers go. They were to ridicule and encourage discord using whatever angst aggression they felt like .

This would exacerbate any effort to continue aligning ones self with the truth movement making them the target for jokes harassment and hostility in an attempt to "shut them up" once and for all.

I have not accused anyone here of being part of that and can not say unequivocally that they had ever initiated the plan.

I am saying this because I have noticed some claims being made here that seem like the person is making a concerted effort in TRYING to look stupid.

I regret that this has gotten to where there are labels for this "type" and that "type" and most of us have gotten selectively deaf towards one another. I too a guilty of a condescending attitude towards dissenters but I make an effort not to. Sometimes that is very hard to do and I hate to say it but it's been the truthers I get angry at.


[edit on 26-8-2007 by Conspiriology]
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7    8    9  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 13 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 7 days ago with 13 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 18 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 14 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 14 hours ago, 68 replies